Negative Play Experience (NPE) a sign of the need for a new/revised edition?

Recommended Posts

You say Zuckuss is NPE, explain how. ... You mentioned a party bus could put out 4-5 damage at range, how?

Bossk + Wired + 4-Lom + Zuckuss + Mercenary Copilot. With all the stress, Wired almost always goes off, making 3-4 hits very likely. Merc & Bossk add one more. Each evade has only a 3/8 chance of being re-rolled. 4-lom nixes the token.

Your next complaint was Autoblasters. This one makes no sense at all. You talk about counter play and outmaneuvering your opponent and then complain about the one upgrade that punishes you primarily for being out flown? It's range one only, that is a huge disadvantage. It's also also 58 points minimum for the build you mentioned with a Lothal Rebel, for **** near 3/5ths my list taken by one ship it better be able to put out some impressive damage.

Range one off a large base is a pretty big area, sir. A large ship with EU is similarly difficult to avoid. Paired with a solid ace, the build works just fine. I finished 4-0 with it in a local tourney, with none of the games taking more than 30 minutes. Faced Palp Aces, triple U-boat, and a couple mixed-ship lists. It was not satisfying to win, nor was it particularly fun for my opponents. I haven't used it since.

Judging off what you consider NPE I'm guessing you play mostly Interceptor based list correct? No offense, but you're attitude towards these upgrades strikes me less as objective reasoning and more as whining about things that you don't want to learn to play around.

Haven't run Empire in several months, actually. I'm primarily a Scum player. As I've stated many, many times, none of these lists are unbeatable--they're just less fun to use or face, and that bothers me. I wondered if this experience was on the upswing for anyone else, so I asked. For some people, it is. Many more are not even aware of the issue.

All in all Xwing has changed quite a lot since its original inception and they've came up with some great ideas, I think a 2.0 to clean up some of the old clutter is about due.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The other day, I was playing with a friend, and we were down to a RAC vs TLT Y-Wing. At this point, we both looked at one another, realized that RAC was probably going to win- but maybe not- and that the match would be _really boring_ to finish. So we quit to grab a bit of dinner.

To me, that's the epitome of an NPE. When even _winning_ is not fun.

Are there more NPEs than there used to be? I don't know. I think there are more decisions being made by each player that can't quite be impacted by another player, this tends to feel less interesting.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The other day, I was playing with a friend, and we were down to a RAC vs TLT Y-Wing. At this point, we both looked at one another, realized that RAC was probably going to win- but maybe not- and that the match would be _really boring_ to finish. So we quit to grab a bit of dinner.

To me, that's the epitome of an NPE. When even _winning_ is not fun.

Are there more NPEs than there used to be? I don't know. I think there are more decisions being made by each player that can't quite be impacted by another player, this tends to feel less interesting.

How dare you not properly support your game: ACE-WING!

So Joe. If I take Soontir and RAC and Vader against you and win, will you flip the table cuz meta?? =)

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

You say Zuckuss is NPE, explain how. ... You mentioned a party bus could put out 4-5 damage at range, how?

Bossk + Wired + 4-Lom + Zuckuss + Mercenary Copilot. With all the stress, Wired almost always goes off, making 3-4 hits very likely. Merc & Bossk add one more. Each evade has only a 3/8 chance of being re-rolled. 4-lom nixes the token.

Your next complaint was Autoblasters. This one makes no sense at all. You talk about counter play and outmaneuvering your opponent and then complain about the one upgrade that punishes you primarily for being out flown? It's range one only, that is a huge disadvantage. It's also also 58 points minimum for the build you mentioned with a Lothal Rebel, for **** near 3/5ths my list taken by one ship it better be able to put out some impressive damage.

Range one off a large base is a pretty big area, sir. A large ship with EU is similarly difficult to avoid. Paired with a solid ace, the build works just fine. I finished 4-0 with it in a local tourney, with none of the games taking more than 30 minutes. Faced Palp Aces, triple U-boat, and a couple mixed-ship lists. It was not satisfying to win, nor was it particularly fun for my opponents. I haven't used it since.

Judging off what you consider NPE I'm guessing you play mostly Interceptor based list correct? No offense, but you're attitude towards these upgrades strikes me less as objective reasoning and more as whining about things that you don't want to learn to play around.

Haven't run Empire in several months, actually. I'm primarily a Scum player. As I've stated many, many times, none of these lists are unbeatable--they're just less fun to use or face, and that bothers me. I wondered if this experience was on the upswing for anyone else, so I asked. For some people, it is. Many more are not even aware of the issue.

All in all Xwing has changed quite a lot since its original inception and they've came up with some great ideas, I think a 2.0 to clean up some of the old clutter is about due.

Ah, irony.

1. That's a very particular party bus, I'm still only counting 4 damage, and that's with perfect rolls. On to the case of perfect rolls, your build lacks anyway to gain focus, target lock, and lacks Dengar. Your only dice mod is the wired that lets you reroll a single focus. If we're talking likely results a "good" roll would probably net you 2-3 hits at range 3, outside of the range 3 band it's worse off then a standard party bus and more expensive to boot. Another key point is it's relying on range 3 shots to justify the cost of Bossk and Mercenary Co-Pilot but this is the range that AT kicks in. You're paying extra points for this combo where the advantage of a extra hit is negated by one of the most common cards in the game.

It's almost as if you made this build purely to try and justify a hyperbole statement

2. I never doubted it could work. I pointed out that for the cost it should be able to put out that kind of damage reliably. Once again, break it down, without any crew it cost 58 points with the cheapest shuttle, 62 if you put the engine upgrade on. That leaves you 38 for your Ace of choice, somewhat limiting considering the cost of Rebel ships. The bigger issue is that's the majority of your points tied up into a ship with little to no damage mitigation. Range one, even on a big ship, is entirely avoidable considering you're also low PS, even on the more expensive Ghost options.

Also I gotta ask, you said you faced triple U-boats with it correct? Was this pre-nerf U-boats? If so I gotta ask how you kept this thing from being deleted by multiple munitions in the opening volley. 16 health melts fairly fast when it has 3 attacks of 3-5 damage coming at it in the opening shots of the game. Considering we don't see this type of build too often at major tournaments despite the list it should theoretically counter being rather prevalent I'm gonna assume that in a game of equal skill most don't find the range one bubble that hard to avoid.

3. What is considered NPE is entirely subjective, but it does ring alarm bells when complaints are all about a particular form of strategy, namely auto damage or reliable hits. For example, Rebel regen dosen't really have much issue with these mechanics as most of their ships are lacking in both green die and the evade action. Even without such mechanics they expect to take damage on the chin anyway. With some obvious exceptions, much the same can be said for Scum.

This just strikes me as complaining about counter play. It's being "that guy" that will adamantly defend his own strategy as being perfectly balanced, underpowered even, and then blatantly cry overpowered on every other strategy that beats him. Your OP wasn't complaining about a wide variety of issues, it was dead set focused on this one particular form of play.

4. I agree that we should have a 2.0 sometime in the near future, but for an entirely different reason why. I'd expect much of what you take issue with to remain mostly untouched in transition to a new edition.

Edited November 20, 2016 by BomberGob

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

While I think you have a point, this part is wrong. Wired lets you reroll one or more focus results. It can actually provide some decent modification, though not as much as other cards.
Edited November 20, 2016 by SabineKey

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I realize there's no way for this to not be read as snarky, although that's not my intent. Nonetheless: if a castling Bossk with Wired and Mercenary Copilot seems like an insurmountable obstacle then you have some room for improvement in both your play and your assessment of the relative strengths and weaknesses of a list.

I would happily fly any variant of Palp Defenders right at that castle. I might lose a Defender in exchange for Bossk but that still means I'm going to win. I would be a bit more circumspect in my approach with RAC + buddy, but that's still perfectly winnable. Quad TLT probably kills Bossk in two turns, losing one Y in the process. Which means it's 3v2 TLTs and I'll take those odds any time. It's actually a fairly scary list if you're running Nora, but that's why you have Biggs or a scarier big brother. Aggressors...yeah, two TLTs don't bother you, you can take that fight. Triple ace is going to come down to range control, flying, and some luck. Two casters I'm less sure about, but Latts crew is going to troll Zuckuss crew pretty hard. Bossk + Dengar alpha strike has pretty good odds of removing a Y-Wing before it fires a single time and will handily win the subsequent 2v2. And so on.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Attitudes and comments like this are are honestly the only truly NPE I have with this game. The game itself is fun (if sometimes flaky and vague), but there are some players who make me question why I play in the first place.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I am afraid I have to agree, at least partially. In case of tournaments it is all about pairing and the lists can be really different or almost the same.

On the other hand, there is a lot of hard countering nowadays. This means that a lot of people are taking lists that are very good against certain builds (and the game is really a NPE for the opponent in such case) but vulnerable to other lists (in which case this is NPE for the other side). I got my 3 defenders shattered by Ion Oicunn and Ryad. After an unlucky bump the game was... like finished. Later I took similar list and the Oicunn hugged Miranda. 9 rounds they did not move and the game took 10 or 11 rounds in total. There was a lot of ioning and little of planning / maneuvering and this was not that good to play.

Though, I have a similar feeling when playing against Dengaroo. His dial is good to a degree in which any of my blocks is just not good enough... All dial open without 2 maneuvers. It's so frustrating... But on the other hand it is good to win against him.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The very concept of something being a NPE is BS frankly, because the term is personally subjective that it means nothing.One man's garbage is another man's treasure.Ideally the developers work towards a balanced game, but changes shouldn't be made just because a few people happen to dislike a given part of it, or a given list.

Just because something is subjective doesn't mean there can't be a general consensus about it. Nothing is ever going to be universally held as an NPE, because you will always have a few holdouts, but there can be a clear consensus.

I'll give you an example from the LCG because it has had a few clear NPE situation's that gave resulted in errata/bans.

They created a very strong but expensive unit called Freeholders that were reduced in cost by the number of cards in the other players hand. By themselves, not an issue. They also introduced an event that caused both players to draw two cards.

This created a situation in which games were often won turn one, independent of what the other player had brought in their deck or even played on their first turn, based on how many of the events were played and how many Freeholder were drawn and now played for free as a result. This lasted 3 weeks before FFG stepped in.

A few months later players realized that a upcoming Boba Fett card with a certain combo would allow players to prevent their opponent from playing any units of 4 cost or lower, which is the vast majority of the units in the game. Without units you don't get to do anything. The combo was neither hard to obtain or easily dusrupted. This lasted a week before it was changed.

Shortly after that another upcoming combo was discovered in which if a player got all 4 cards needed for it they'd win the game that turn unless their opponent had an answer in which there were only a few of already on the table. This got addressed by FFG before it was even released.

In all 3 of those situations you had a few holdouts that said they weren't an NPE and didn't need to be addressed. But outside of those few holdouts there was a consensus that they were NPE issues that would make players not want to play. Subjective or not, there can be a general consensus on the subject.

But I also bring those examples up to show what an actual NPE would look like. An Autoblaster turret that you can beat just by positioning and a castle Party Bus that loses to many lists if it tries that gimmck are not anywhere close to something that would be held as a consensus NPE.

NPE can't just he used as a term for things that one person doesn't like, because you're correct it becomes meaningless in that misuse.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

the only true NPE to me was torpboats. All the other lists, even Dengaroo, actually have some variance on there both in upgrades or approach, while torpboats literally did the same thing every time and if you didnt face them perfectly, you lost. Nothing should be that easy to win with where it hinges more on your opponent not being a boss than you knowing what youre doing: im glad they nerfed that to oblivion.

Theres always going to be some cheesy strat people pull in any game no matter how balanced it is. The question is can they be dealt with without specific lists and vastly outplaying your opponent? Except for torpboats, nothing fits that bill. Ive beaten Dengaroo way more than ive beaten torpboats, and while i'd say its hard to face them its still interesting because its not strictly "move forward 1, barrelback if not gonna get a range3 shot, focus otherwise" like torpboats was. In fact the Dengaroo i faced a couple saturdays ago tried to play just like that and i walked all over him because of it lol.

Also that ghost build is really rare. Ive seen it...twice? it was herald as the unbeatable, unavoidable damage output.....except both games i faced it just stayed out of range1 and did my best to stay at range3 in case he moved a little faster than i predicted. The ghost is a tank, tanks dont move very well. Nothing slows them down, but everything can skirt around them. The moment you didnt dance around it right though, suddenly that massive cannon is pointing at your head and you dead.

Actually ive faced a lot of these powerhouse lists and simply by opting to be in odd spots at range3 i was able to beat them. Range1 is a trap. Unless you can set up your own trap, opt for range3.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

1. That's a very particular party bus, I'm still only counting 4 damage, and that's with perfect rolls. On to the case of perfect rolls, your build lacks anyway to gain focus, target lock, and lacks Dengar. Your only dice mod is the wired that lets you reroll a single focus. If we're talking likely results a "good" roll would probably net you 2-3 hits at range 3, outside of the range 3 band it's worse off then a standard party bus and more expensive to boot. Another key point is it's relying on range 3 shots to justify the cost of Bossk and Mercenary Co-Pilot but this is the range that AT kicks in. You're paying extra points for this combo where the advantage of a extra hit is negated by one of the most common cards in the game.

It's almost as if you made this build purely to try and justify a hyperbole statement

HLC gets four potential hits. Merc turns one into a crit. Bossk turns the crit into two more hits. Wired also lets you reroll all focus results. Autothrusters means you take four damage instead of five... and most ships that can take autothrusters can't eat four damage. Nearly the same effect at range one (albeit, without the guaranteed crit).

It still appears that I've failed to make my point, so I'll try one more time.

It's not that the builds I mentioned are unbeatable. It's that they are not enjoyable to fly against, nor are they satisfying to win with. It used to be that there was really only one list like this--the quad TLT list. Again, another list that wasn't unbeatable, but one that was boring to fly and also negated a huge number of opposing lists. In my opinion, the number of lists in the same vein are increasing.

If you think these kinds of lists are a joy to fly with/against, or that it's entertaining to lose your ability to participate in the game... I have nothing else to say.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

A Negative Player Experience to me means that something in the game causes the player to no longer enjoy the game. I don't mean something like "losing", that's just poor sportsmanship on the losers side. You should be able to play X-Wing, lose, and still have a good time playing against a challenging opponent. A NPE list would be something that simply is not fun to play against. Something that if your opponent set it down across the table from you, you would literally say, "Nah, thanks anyways; I changed my mind and don't feel like playing anymore."

Its not that its unbeatable, or bends/breaks the rules somehow, its simply not fun to play against causing the player to not want to play X-Wing. It causes the player to have a negative experience playing the game.

Some examples of this from other competitive games I've played are PvE MMO's that incorporated PvP components. Often there are classes that use Control effects, tying down enemies for a length of time so that they can be slowly killed over time or left at the mercy of a friend. While these classes are great in PvE content, they are a NPE in PvP due to the fact that they take away the ability for a player to be playing the game. It's one thing to lose because you were outplayed, its a complete different thing to lose because the game stops responding to any input from you and you just sit there watching yourself be killed. You are no longer playing the game at that point. Game Developers end up having to adjust and limit the effectiveness of Control classes in PvP to keep them effective, but not so overpowering that they prevent people from being able to play the game.

I can get what CatPeeler is saying in lists that prevent the player from participating are a NPE.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The other day, I was playing with a friend, and we were down to a RAC vs TLT Y-Wing. At this point, we both looked at one another, realized that RAC was probably going to win- but maybe not- and that the match would be _really boring_ to finish. So we quit to grab a bit of dinner.

To me, that's the epitome of an NPE. When even _winning_ is not fun.

Are there more NPEs than there used to be? I don't know. I think there are more decisions being made by each player that can't quite be impacted by another player, this tends to feel less interesting.

This along with the OPs point about "participating" is at the heart of the discussion. Everyone keeps getting caught up in the lists and answers but if you look at something like chess no one really ever claims the game is unfair. Same with things like Backgammon or Go. I get my move, you get your move, and while luck comes into it you don't ever feel as though the decisions you've made simply don't matter (cold cold dice in backgammon aside.)

At the heart of this is what has become the flow-chart needed nature of all the actions that can be taken. There seem to me (I know I know "git gud") far too many variables between your flow-chart of actions and your opponent's flow-chart of actions to feel as though your decisions are important beyond don't miss a step in your flow-chart. This can be less interesting.

To go bring this back to Magic and the immediately banned "Memory Jar Deck" where the deck could win on the first turn before the opponent even got to play a land. While this is extreme I found that all of the advocates for that deck or for those disappointed in the immediate nerf were players who never wanted to play alternate formats or just grab some pre-constructed decks and play. They also didn't seem to know chess or backgammon or have much interest in other games. There is wanting to win and wanting the game to be interesting. These thing don't necessarily go together but typically most of my NPEs are against players who don't really want the game to be interesting.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Just because something is subjective doesn't mean there can't be a general consensus about it.

True, but it also doesn't mean there is a general consensus about it just because someone doesn't like it.

NPE can't just he used as a term for things that one person doesn't like, because you're correct it becomes meaningless in that misuse.

And yet pretty much every example of it I see here is exactly that. It's something some person doesn't like, but they try to give their opinion extra weight by using a catchphrase. As for your examples, those are all examples of inherently unbalanced cards/combos. Which I think everyone could agree need to be addressed because they are unbalanced.

Something that if your opponent set it down across the table from you, you would literally say, "Nah, thanks anyways; I changed my mind and don't feel like playing anymore."

Which is so personally subjective that it means nothing, and it also implies that you should have a say over what the other guys is playing.

It causes the player to have a negative experience playing the game.

That is quite frankly on that player and that player alone. If you refuse to play against a given list that is as you admit balanced... That's on you.

It is not however something that needs to be addressed by the game developers, or something that needs to be fixed.

Edit: What I find somewhat offensive is the idea that if I'm playing a given list, that I'm somehow doing something wrong because someone else doesn't like my list.

Again if the list is broken in some way, that's one thing. But just because someone doesn't like what that list does doesn't mean there's something inherently wrong with it.

If I was playing a friend, and I used a highly effective list involving Ion's vs his arc dodgers, and had been playing it for the last 10 games... I'd say he'd have reason to ask me to play something else. Then again if he's highly effective using arc dodgers then perhaps the issue is the only way I stand a chance is by using ions.

If I'm playing at league or a pick up game, I really don't owe it to anyone to play a list they approve of.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Edit: What I find somewhat offensive is the idea that if I'm playing a given list, that I'm somehow doing something wrong because someone else doesn't like my list.

...

If I'm playing at league or a pick up game, I really don't owe it to anyone to play a list they approve of.

I never implied that you are doing anything wrong, and similarly nobody owes you anything either, man. Don't get bent out of shape if someone looks at your list, then realizes that they left the tea kettle on. If someone doesn't like playing against something, they shouldn't waste their night; they simply can just not play against it.

If this happens once, its not a problem. If it is happening often, across the world with many different players, then the game developers need to determine what is causing people to not want to play the game that keeps them in business and correct it.

Otherwise their kids won't be able to go to college. If that means one particular list gets the nerfbat, ok then; it'll be for the betterment of the game.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I never implied that you are doing anything wrong, and similarly nobody owes you anything either, man.

I'd say the term NPE does in fact imply that someone is doing something wrong. I mean I'm not sure how else you can take it.

If someone doesn't like playing against something, they shouldn't waste their night; they simply can just not play against it.

Sure, but again that's on them. That doesn't mean there's something wrong that needs to be fixed.

If it is happening often, across the world with many different players, then the game developers need to determine what is causing people to not want to play the game that keeps them in business and correct it.

If it proves that there's something unbalanced then yes that needs to be addressed, such as the deadeye nerf. Saying something that is broken creates a negative experience is fairly obvious.

But most of the time when someone comes here and complains about something being a NPE what they're really saying is they don't like something and rather than learn to deal with or beat it, they want it fixed for them.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Also, let's not lose track of the fact that the OP feels the whole game needs to be overhauled to address his personal and subjective issues with how the game is currently.

That is really a fairly egotistical thing to suggest... That the whole game needs to be overhauled because someone doesn't like some parts of it.

Or alternatively, let's not lose track of my actual statement: that my opinion is that the number of NPE experiences is on the rise, and--if so--can it be fixed with a few nerfs, or is a new edition needed?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

that my opinion is that the number of NPE experiences is on the rise, and--if so--can it be fixed with a few nerfs, or is a new edition needed?

Still sounds like you want a rework of the game, even if only in the form of nerfs because of something you dislike. Because you're not asking if things need to be changed, you are stating that they do need to be changed, because of things you don't like. Yet you offer nothing to support that they're objectively bad for the game.

What I'm trying to say and perhaps am not making clear. Is that if someone can show that something is objectively bad for the game, it needs to be addressed. However if all you have is one person's or even a group of people saying something is not fun, that isn't grounds to change anything.

The days of the Phantom Menace for example, was objectively proven to be bad for the game. It forced out pretty much everything other than two archetypes, Whisper with VI and ACD or Fat Han. Nothing else could complete in the meta, and as such it had to be dealt with.

However that wasn't a NPE, that wasn't something someone or even a group of people disliked, it was an imbalance in the game itself.

What you refer to as NPE's is personally subjective and things that other people may find quite enjoyable both to play with and against. They are also things that will be changed with the release of the next wave, the same way that the meta always changes with the next wave.

If the whole of your argument is that you find something not to be fun... Then you quite frankly don't have a valid argument. If you can show how that thing is distorting the meta or somehow harmful to the game as a whole then you do. But since the very idea of a NPE is inherently subjective and personal then it almost never is going to be a valid argument for anything.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Attitudes and comments like this are are honestly the only truly NPE I have with this game. The game itself is fun (if sometimes flaky and vague), but there are some players who make me question why I play in the first place.

then don't play this game.

Tyllon, you have 6 posts on account, and in 2 of them you are rude. Be nice or sign off.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

There is a point in which if someone doesn't care for the current meta, it may be that the best thing they can do is step away from the game until the meta changes.

Because if there's one thing you can count on, is that the top meta lists change with every release, and if there's something you don't enjoy about the current one, it's likely it will change with the next one.

This isn't a "love it or leave it!" kind of thing, just that people need to recognize that just because the meta favores a given thing now, it most likely won't in a few months. But also just because there's something in the meta someone doesn't like, that doesn't mean it needs to be changed.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

...if someone can show that something is objectively bad for the game...

...for example, was objectively proven to be bad for the game. ...

You keep using that word like it means something to the discussion.

But since the very idea of a NPE is inherently subjective and personal then it almost never is going to be a valid argument for anything.

Look, in game development, on one hand there is player experience (often referred as PX, not PE or NPE, but that's irrelevant) and on another hand there is game balance. While there is some relation between the two, they are two different subjects, and both relevant to the success of failure of a game.

Player experience, or "fun", is a very subjective thing, however it is in fact, measurable. Game developers measure it all the time and I would bet money that there is someone at FFG whose job involves looking at some internal app or maybe a simple spreadsheet that reports all sorts of metrics such as increase or decrease of sales, the types and numbers of ships and upgrades used in all those nice reports they get from Organized Play events and other online reporting tools used by players, and also measurement of the number and types of discussions that appears on fan sites, such as these very forums. The data is collected and metrics measured and they come up with some sort of idea of the increase or decrease of player experience, and what parts are and are not "fun" in X-Wing and their other games.

Something can be balanced, and not fun. Tic-Tac-Toe is a perfectly balanced game, so much so, that two players of equivalent skill will always come to a Draw result. It is boring as hell for anyone that knows how the game works.

Your demand that a problem be a demonstrable balance problem to be relevant and important for you, as you have repeatedly referred to it, but balance is not the discussion here. Player experience, or "fun", is the subject.

Game developers that ignore player experience soon become ex-game developers. Yes, that means they have to worry about the subjective things too.

PS There are many papers online discussing game development and how to measure PX. You may want to look them up. As an amateur game developer, myself, I've gleaned quite a bit from online sources.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

So as soon as someone declares something to not be fun it needs to change? The fact that one person finds something to be fun that someone else doesn't... The person who enjoys it gets no say in the matter?

This idea that something is not fun and needs to change is the problem, because it assumes that the only opinion that matters is the person who doesn't enjoy something.

If I were to say that I find playing against imperial ships to not be fun, does that mean the whole faction needs to be removed? Or should that just because I don't enjoy something doesn't mean everyone else should be forced to play the way I want?

Because that's pretty much what the whole NPE argument boils down too, someone doesn't like something and rather than learn how deal with it, or recognize that their opinion isn't the only one that matters they come here and demand that someone else's toy be taken away because they don't like it.

If someone says "I don't like X" then we can have a discussion about how they can deal with it, what they can counter it with, or maybe even how they can avoid it.

That is a completely different thing from someone coming here and saying "I don't like X so it should be taken out of the game" with nothing but their own very subjective opinion to back that up.

If you can't see the difference then there is no point in discussing it further.